Criminals are most often cowards if they think a potential victim might be armed or a home owner might have guns in the house they will think twice before victimizing a citizen.

Washington D. C. and NYC have the strictest gun laws in the nation yet they are two of the highest murder per capata cities in the nation.

Check your stats. Homes with guns in them are no less likely to be burgled than homes without. Even ones with those cute signs about how their neighbor doesn't have a gun.

Know why?

Burglars know that A) you're likely not going to be home when they rob you, B) even if you were, statistically speaking, the chances of you getting to your gun before they're in and out with what they came there to do are slim.

Go to any police department website, or just do a Google search for "burglary prevention tips". Hmmm...looks like right off the top page, the cities of Memphis, Los Angeles and Phoenix don't mention owning a gun anywhere on their burglary prevention tips.

What affirmation bias liberal echo chamber? 87% of people here thing guns save lives -- no one is denying that 87% of people who answered the poll have that opinion. I pointed out that, likely, most of those 87% pf people would have the contradictory opinion that guns don't kill (people kill!). The reality is, people do both the killing and the saving, not the guns which are merely tools. In other words, you can't have it both ways.

Meanwhile, you come up with a pointless, lame, hypocritical ad hominem. Great job there vapid one.

What affirmation bias liberal echo chamber? 87% of people here thing guns save lives -- no one is denying that 87% of people who answered the poll have that opinion. I pointed out that, likely, most of those 87% pf people would have the contradictory opinion that guns don't kill (people kill!). The reality is, people do both the killing and the saving, not the guns which are merely tools. In other words, you can't have it both ways.

Meanwhile, you come up with a pointless, lame, hypocritical ad hominem. Great job there vapid one.

The one you just threw, defending what goes on here now by dragging something irrelevant in from LAST YEAR by others as a defense.

As far as the gun issue, since more drive by drunken drivers than are murdered by guns annually, those who want gun restrictions need to be consistent and demand at the least the same restrictions on booze they want for guns, otherwise their "it's for saving lives" rhetoric is nothing but hollow political opportunism off the fresh corpses of the latest cash-in shooting.

Check your stats. Homes with guns in them are no less likely to be burgled than homes without. Even ones with those cute signs about how their neighbor doesn't have a gun.

Know why?

Burglars know that A) you're likely not going to be home when they rob you, B) even if you were, statistically speaking, the chances of you getting to your gun before they're in and out with what they came there to do are slim.

Go to any police department website, or just do a Google search for "burglary prevention tips". Hmmm...looks like right off the top page, the cities of Memphis, Los Angeles and Phoenix don't mention owning a gun anywhere on their burglary prevention tips.

I wonder why that is.

Because they're not made to "prevent" burglaries, but rather fend off breakins in progress.

The one you just threw, defending what goes on here now by dragging something irrelevant in from LAST YEAR by others as a defense.

What was I defending, hmm?

Quote:

As far as the gun issue, since more drive by drunken drivers than are murdered by guns annually, those who want gun restrictions need to be consistent and demand at the least the same restrictions on booze they want for guns, otherwise their "it's for saving lives" rhetoric is nothing but hollow political opportunism off the fresh corpses of the latest cash-in shooting.

The one you just threw, defending what goes on here now by dragging something irrelevant in from LAST YEAR by others as a defense.

As far as the gun issue, since more drive by drunken drivers than are murdered by guns annually, those who want gun restrictions need to be consistent and demand at the least the same restrictions on booze they want for guns, otherwise their "it's for saving lives" rhetoric is nothing but hollow political opportunism off the fresh corpses of the latest cash-in shooting.

How much more money have the gun manufacturers made since Newtown?

Cash-in is right. And you gomers are the ones doing the lining of the pockets.

If the media herd vag cavs weren't calling for gun bans left and right, nobody would be running out and buying everything up anticipating a ban.

I see, so even though you and pretty much every other gun nut on here has admitted that there will never be a gun ban because there's no support for it, you're still stupid enough to go out and buy 14 guns every time one of your gun-wielding peers shoots a bunch of people.

Perhaps you have severe short term memory loss but it's easily seen in scrolling up the page. Beyond that, I'm not the one dispensing your Ritalin.

Have a nice evening.

Yep, very easily seen by scrolling up the page. We're talking about whether or not guns save lives, not whether or not we should have more restrictions. Before that we had a tangent about Lanza/Sandy Hook. No mention of gun control until you tried to go off on that tangent.

Yep, very easily seen by scrolling up the page. We're talking about whether or not guns save lives, not whether or not we should have more restrictions. Before that we had a tangent about Lanza/Sandy Hook. No mention of gun control until you tried to go off on that tangent.

Vapid one is vapid.

Well considering he voted No, I can only assume either since there was no option for both, he chose the one he most identified with. Or that he believes that guns magically save lives by preventing robberies (but only ones in progress, because thwre's no statistical evidence to support the idea that they prevent them in the first place), but someone do NOT kill people.